Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
97 lines (64 loc) · 3.04 KB

File metadata and controls

97 lines (64 loc) · 3.04 KB

Windows Security Event Analysis — Findings

Lab Overview

This lab analyzes Windows Security Event Logs collected from a Windows 10 virtual machine and ingested into Splunk. The goal is to identify authentication, privilege, and group activity patterns and interpret them from a SOC analyst perspective.

Data Source: Windows Security Logs
Index: security_lab
Sourcetype: _json
Host: SecurityLabVM


Finding 1 — Burst of Failed Logons (4625)

Evidence:
Multiple failed logon events (Event ID 4625) were observed in rapid succession for the same account and host.

Interpretation:
This pattern resembles a brute-force or misconfigured service repeatedly attempting to authenticate using invalid credentials.

Why it matters:
Repeated authentication failures can indicate credential guessing attacks or exposed services that attackers may exploit.

What I would do next:

  • Correlate with successful logons (4624) for the same account.
  • Check source network addresses for external or unexpected origins.
  • Confirm whether the account is used by a legitimate service.

Finding 2 — Successful Logons (4624)

Evidence:
A significant number of successful logon events were observed.

Interpretation:
Represents normal authentication activity including interactive, system, and service logons.

Why it matters:
Establishes a baseline for normal behavior. Deviations such as logons at unusual times or from unexpected systems could indicate compromise.

What I would do next:

  • Filter logons by time-of-day and account name.
  • Identify logons following repeated failures.

Finding 3 — Privileged Logons (4672)

Evidence:
Multiple instances of Event ID 4672 were observed, indicating special privileges assigned at logon.

Interpretation:
Accounts with administrative or elevated rights logged into the system.

Why it matters:
Privileged access is high-risk and commonly targeted by attackers for lateral movement and persistence.

What I would do next:

  • Identify which accounts received privileges.
  • Verify if access aligns with expected administrative activity.

Finding 4 — Local Group Modifications (4735)

Evidence:
Local group modification events were detected.

Interpretation:
Group membership or permissions were altered on the endpoint.

Why it matters:
Attackers may modify local groups to escalate privileges or maintain persistence.

What I would do next:

  • Identify which group was modified and by whom.
  • Verify whether the change was authorized.

Finding 5 — Group Membership Enumeration (4798 / 4799)

Evidence:
Group membership enumeration events were observed.

Interpretation:
A user or process queried group memberships, often part of reconnaissance.

Why it matters:
Reconnaissance activity can precede privilege escalation or targeted attacks.

What I would do next:

  • Correlate with suspicious logon or privilege events.
  • Check which process or account initiated the enumeration.